Man complains that British Army recruitment stall featured soldiers with, er, guns

A man from Irvine in Scotland has criticised the MoD after British Army troops from the Scots Guards set up in the town centre with guns.
Yes, you read that correctly, soldiers had guns.
Campaigner and Ayrshire CND secretary Arthur West was quoted in a local paper, the Irvine Times, as saying:
“The stall was a recruitment stall and as well as leaflets it had four machine guns pointing into a pedestrian shopping area. I was really quite disturbed by what I saw. I’ll not say the guns were loaded but they were pointing out on to the street and I just think that’s unacceptable.
If they’re going to try and recruit in areas they should do it responsibility, they should be handing out leaflets in a reasonable way, I was quite shocked. I have seen this in a few places. I was in Kilmarnock about a year ago, and also in Glasgow.
I’ve already got worries anyway that they seem to concentrate on schools and areas that have high unemployment. We had reports last week that areas of Irvine have a third of child poverty, and suffered down the years from a lot of job losses as well. There does seem to be a link about the army giving a high profile to recruitment in areas where there is high unemployment and low income, and if they’re going to do that they need to do that responsibly.
I just think it’s really distasteful and if they’re going to recruit they should be doing it in a balanced way. I just think it’s totally inappropriate. The time in Kilmarnock, I think the soldiers that were there were a bit embarrassed about it, there wasn’t any dust up, but I went and spoke to them and think they felt a bit awkward about it.
They were just doing their job and as people know the army is very hierarchical and you do as you’re told, so I did think it would be a bit unfair to have a go at the people that were there on the day. There were four soldiers and they were all quite young. I made a formal complaint but would be interested to see any response.”
A spokesperson for the British Army said:
“The display weapons were under the control of professional soldiers who apply the highest standard of weapon discipline. At no point where they pointed at members of the public and no ammunition was present during this event.”

He's right, soldiers pointing guns towards a pedestrian shopping centre really isn't a very clever idea, which is the point he's making.

"...as well as leaflets it had four machine guns pointing into a pedestrian shopping area. I was really quite disturbed by what I saw. I’ll not say the guns were loaded but they were pointing out on to the street and I just think that’s unacceptable."

He also made a good point about the army specifically targeting poverty ridden, low income areas.

I feel obliged to point out that due to the way these weapons are carried unless the soldiers remain stock still or simply bury the items in the ground then theyre going to point somewhere.
Yes but this has been express army policy for many years - indeed it is seen as a way to elevate people out of the poverty trap.

I'm curious if he would have an issue with police officers carrying guns in public as well?

Yes but this has been express army policy for many years - indeed it is seen as a way to elevate people out of the poverty trap.

I also feel obliged to point out it's basic gun discipline not to point the gun at something you're not trying to kill. Loaded or not. Out of every direction they can be pointed at, the one with a shopping centre is the least appropriate. Even the NRA, the biggest organisation of gun nuts on the planet, stress this.

If nothing else, it makes our armed forces look undisciplined.

I'm pretty sure he would, if they weren't currently on an operation. Even then, they still shouldn't be pointing weapons at a pedestrianised area.

It being an army policy isn't an argument against the exploitative nature of it. Preying on poor people with a trumped up and misguided sense of nationalism into putting their lives on the line for interests that often go against their own is certainly something to complain about.

I guess pointing the guns at a pedestrians is similar to what the british army has done in recent years. killing innocent people.

Accuracy is important.

I feel you're missing the point of a demonstration here.

And them running riot in the local boozer doesnt?

Have you got a better way to show their guns off? also you seem to be ignoring the basic fact that this happens all the time, idly holding your weapon is not quite the same as aiming it at someone [something which would be unacceptable]

I feel you should be blaming the government in this instance, not the armed forces. At any rate whilst i take a dim view on our armed forces i am inclined to disagree hole heartedly here - whether you like it or not the army does offer people who come from disadvantaged back grounds a way out. The army never discharged someone who was illiterate after all.

Colateral damage has been the lowest ever in the last decade.

Tell that to the 1/2 million dead iraqis.

The Iraq war was horrific and fought not because it would make anything better but the political elites wanted revenge on Saddam Hussein.

But in the context of war, soldiers and terrorists can't be regarded as civillians; and it was mostly the USA. The scale was tragic but still less than Vietnam.

This looks like an excuse.

It's a fact.

Why did they need to bring weapons? They arent toys. Did they expect to need them?

do you really need to ask this?

Young boys like guns.
want boys to be interested in the army?
Bring guns.

/thread

It's actually surprising they don't have replica or deactivated guns for these kind of things tbh (or maybe they do/did, an the guy who complained has even less to moan about)

do you really need to ask this?

Young boys like guns.
want boys to be interested in the army?
Bring guns.